CAVC Case 91-504: Back

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · October 5, 1994 · NEBEKER, Chief Judge

This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.

What would this rating pay you? (2026 rates)

Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.

per month ·  per year, tax-free

Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.

2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
RatingMonthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA)
10%$180.42
20%$356.66
30%$552.47
40%$795.84
50%$1,132.90
60%$1,435.02
70%$1,808.45
80%$2,102.15
90%$2,362.30
100%$3,938.58
See your full claim picture — free
Outcome
Unknown
Decision Date
October 5, 1994
Judge
NEBEKER, Chief Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackCervicalRespiratory

Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.

Issues on Appeal

BackCervicalRespiratory

Why It Was Decided This Way

In decisions dated September and December 1974, the RO denied entitlement to non-service-connected pension; those decisions did not address the issue of service connection.

In an August 1978 decision, the Board found that chronic obstructive lung disease had not been shown to be present until many years after service and denied service connection.

In a January 1991 decision, the Board denied entitlement to service connection for COPD.

In February 1993, the RO again denied service connection, concluding that "the medical information that we received in reply to the [Court's] remand of your claim does not constitute new and material evidence".

In an April 1993 written presentation to the BVA, the veteran's representative argued that the preponderance of the evidence was in the veteran's favor and urged the Board to award service connection.

In the July 19, 1993, decision here on appeal, the Board determined that the claim was well grounded and that new and material evidence, in the form of private physician statements opining that the veteran's COPD had begun in service, had been presented.

The Board noted that, although the RO had determined that new and material evidence had not been presented, "we do not believe the veteran has been prejudiced in any way in the presentation of his claim by this determination.

The Board stated as follows: It is clear from the veteran's substantive appeal that he disagrees with the RO's determination that the additional evidence was not new and material, but he has also presented contentions and arguments regarding the merits of his claim.

Authorities Cited

Bagby v. DerwinskiBernard v. Brown Prejudice Standard In BernardButts v. BrownColvin v. DerwinskiCox v. BrownCurry v. DerwinskiEspiritu v. DerwinskiFrankel v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGrottveit v. BrownHare v. DerwinskiJustus v. PrincipiManio v. DerwinskiReonal v. BrownSee Austin v. BrownSee Masors v. DerwinskiSee Miller v. FentonSimon v. DerwinskiSuttmann v. BrownThurber v. Brown

Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)

38 USC 5107(a)38 USC 5107(b)38 USC 510838 USC 7104(b)38 USC 7104(d)(1)38 USC 7261(a)(1)38 USC 7261(a)(4)

Denial Type

Credibility|Not New Material|Preponderance Against

Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim

VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.

Run my claim through VetAid →
Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.